With respect to the "politick": / by Cliff McCormick

With respect to the “politick”: I choose to abstain from participation in the traditional narrative and exchange.

I’ve had my fill in seasons past, seen and said enough to accrue sufficient savvy with respect to the state of play and nature of the game afoot – and will not participate in the perpetuation and generation of the “static” that has come to constitute our political discourse; will not abide a game whos end is so obviously not in the best interest of the general welfare – but rather, has become the national equivalent of “pay no attention to the man behind the curtain” a game of ”do/focus on this so you are not doing/seeing that”.

It’s much --- easier to control a populace that is divided --- “fighting”/focusing/arguing over conveniently constructed narratives/scapegoats and middlemen than it is to govern a well informed and unified one.

The conversation would become notably more nuanced, and far less convenient for those who occupy offices of “representation” (also a charitable characterization) if we ceased to allow our standard of inquisition and metrics of meaningful success to be artificially lowered, squandered and stunted for the sake of personal gain, political power and influence.

Which is not to say I do not vote, I do. – VOTE. Make choices, be determinant; craft, wring and wrest if you must; participate particularly in those ways which do make a difference, the vote matters and the manner of participation matters as well.

The bastardization of our public and political discourse this election is in equal measure heartening and utterly frightening.

On one hand, it serves to highlight and underline in triplicate the extent to which “Private Interest(s)” have infiltrated the public process, and the degree to which, he or she who spends or has the most, says/matters/is heard/represented the most. --- I refuse to wax explicitly prolific on this issue, if the myriad ways in which the above can be applied to our present political-landscape escapes your attention – then this communique entire is likely lost regardless. – One who would choose to call a green triangle a red square for instance, is beyond the purview of logical argumentation and debate; in other words, willful ignorance is just that, and very little else can be said or done. Adopting a position or view that is so obviously contrary to factual comportment and the things of sense ---see birthers, a presidential secret muslim, skewing "end of life" consultation with doctors being covered under a public plan into "death panels" -- nonsense -- etc… is to be complicit in the goal of intentional obfuscation; redirecting energy that could be better spent identifying real problems and implementing sound solutions. And while reason should disallow these childish and ridiculous exclamations and excitations from coming to the fore, these insincere, purchased and pushed narratives largely come to constitute the majority of the “argument” (a charitable characterization, given the laughably insubstantial nature of the claims themselves) forwarded by an entire wing of our political establishment; the majority in fact -- when lies become a matter of course, what are we doing but playing plays; telling, selling, tales, stories and fables? Sides of hocus to go with our pocus. *grin*

– When the dollar reigns -- what becomes of the difference between “Made for TV/Hollywood/Fiction” and “I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of President” - but the budget for FX and the talent of the script writer?

We are witnessing the vanishing of the delta that spares us the aforementioned epsilon. – Which is to say that very little separates the players in politics from characters in scripted drama, particularly when the most visible participants in our political process are beholden to decades old ties, obligations and well established interests.

--Have I mentioned I do not “politick” anymore? It is not a game of the people; though it is certainly intended “for” us ---- to our detriment or betterment is, as it has ever been, a matter of our collective choice and action; --- I for one like the idea of access to a Universal Single Payer Healthcare system for all U.S. citizens, I like phasing in a living wage, I like free tuition at public institutions provided the student maintains a decent academic standard of achievement, I appreciate the second amendment, I believe some debates are beyond silly – I think debating over marriage equality is silly, I think public debate over a womens personal reproductive rights is silly, I think people in jail because of cannabis is silly – these are the anachronistic and archaic echoes of a puritanical past which constitute the persistent momenta of an outdated era, insufficient to and unbecoming of the potential of our modern age--- I think the tax code is atrocious and obviously deliberately obtuse and incoherently labyrinthine precisely because it allows greater latitude for “creative accounting and fiscal indiscretion” – I think a Federal tax code can fit in less than 50 pages and be efficient, across the board legible and largely agreed upon to be broadly equitable  ---

though …if we allow ourselves to be successfully sequestered; divided and conquered --- and find ourselves busy talking/focusing/arguing about who’s putting what in whos where – and who said what latest outrageous thing (precisely because the outrage takes the focus off things of substance) – then we are falling in line with the script as written --- if the “elected representatives” that are supposed to be having these substantive discussions, finding these refinements and implementing efficient changes are in fact “instituted,” bought and paid for by “Private Interest(s)”--- then something as, frustratingly straightforward as publicly heard/debated and then enacted tax code overhaul/simplification --- is beyond laughable to even begin to suggest as a matter of serious policy.

Ah, would that it were not so – but we’ve been left with our Liberty, no? *grin*